not on facebook
ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (UPDATED 2017)... HERE

ANNOUNCEMENT : NEW CORONAVIRUS FORUM... HERE



staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 16:53

how many are leaving after a few weeks-months?
1 at ours just handed their notice in, worked together a couple of times and was far better than quite a few experienced posties in attitude, i.e willingly help to their best ability and more,
however due to management bullying or intimidation was ground down and has had enough, this with some union help too
sad state of affairs losing staff who were willing to go the extra mile but RM took the pi55

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 17:59

I think Royal Mail has always had a staff retention problem with people thinking it is just a stop gap job until they can find something better, but I think things did improve for quite a few years ,but the job has changed so much with the way they treat people and what they expect them to do that I really do think staff retention is going to get worse again,but I don,t suppose they will care much as long as they can get replacements. :cuppa

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 19:08

Personally i think new starters have it pretty easy compared to when i started in 2004.
In my office most of them are kept on a duty/rota for months, always the ''nice" areas, never the "shitholes".
Almost all the vacant duties are part-time so there's a chance they can get a duty straight away.
Meanwhile FT reserves like myself can't get a duty and only ever deliver to the less desirable areas.
DOM wonders why he gets a s**t HYS score.
CWU rep not really interested.

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 19:21

30+YEARMAN wrote:....,but I don,t suppose they will care much as long as they can get replacements. :cuppa

It costs a lot of money to recruit and train a newstart.
You can't keep pissing money down the drain.

Part of the problem is a 25 hour contract isn't a living wage.
It doesn't provide a worthwhile pension.
It takes up a large chunk of the day, 5 days/week (with no advance warning of when the day off is scheduled) making a second job problematic.

You have very little contact with your work colleagues and virtually all your working day is physical graft.

I thought that was why one of the clauses in the 4 Pillars agreement was about upping contracts wherever and whenever possible.

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 20:17

clashcityrocker wrote:It costs a lot of money to recruit and train a newstart.
You can't keep pissing money down the drain.

Part of the problem is a 25 hour contract isn't a living wage.
It doesn't provide a worthwhile pension.
It takes up a large chunk of the day, 5 days/week (with no advance warning of when the day off is scheduled) making a second job problematic.


Yes. And the union won't address this (in fairness it is now a widespread problem in society in general and pretty much ignored by all political parties, including - and disgracefully - Labour).

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 21:26

yubin282 wrote:Personally i think new starters have it pretty easy compared to when i started in 2004.
In my office most of them are kept on a duty/rota for months, always the ''nice" areas, never the "shitholes".
Almost all the vacant duties are part-time so there's a chance they can get a duty straight away.
Meanwhile FT reserves like myself can't get a duty and only ever deliver to the less desirable areas.
DOM wonders why he gets a s**t HYS score.
CWU rep not really interested.


And you would like it more if the new starters would be put on shitholes duties as you say and leavde in few weeks?
Your attitude is not great my friend...

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 21:29

DGH wrote:
clashcityrocker wrote:It costs a lot of money to recruit and train a newstart.
You can't keep pissing money down the drain.

Part of the problem is a 25 hour contract isn't a living wage.
It doesn't provide a worthwhile pension.
It takes up a large chunk of the day, 5 days/week (with no advance warning of when the day off is scheduled) making a second job problematic.


Yes. And the union won't address this (in fairness it is now a widespread problem in society in general and pretty much ignored by all political parties, including - and disgracefully - Labour).


Labour have rightfully made a big deal of the growing proliferation of zero hour contracts and the gig economy for several years now to be fair and RM at least provide part timers with relatively secure employment compared to the aforementioned.

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 22:33

Janet Brum wrote:
yubin282 wrote:Personally i think new starters have it pretty easy compared to when i started in 2004.
In my office most of them are kept on a duty/rota for months, always the ''nice" areas, never the "shitholes".
Almost all the vacant duties are part-time so there's a chance they can get a duty straight away.
Meanwhile FT reserves like myself can't get a duty and only ever deliver to the less desirable areas.
DOM wonders why he gets a s**t HYS score.
CWU rep not really interested.


And you would like it more if the new starters would be put on shitholes duties as you say and leavde in few weeks?
Your attitude is not great my friend...


No, i just think its very different to how things were for me back in the day. When i started i was on what was considered the worst duty in the office for the first 6 months. Didn't complain just got on with it, started at correct time was always last out and always last finished everyday.

Then one day the DOM thought "well he hasn't complained yet", so eventually i was put on different duties and realised how easy some people had it. From then on it was a different duty everyday. Fortunately I'm not someone who gets stressed or flustered easily.

Just my opinion.

staff turnover

03 Aug 2019, 23:13

I have been in the job 5 months.....Reasons why I'd potentially leave...


- I am tired all the time. I was hoping I'd get over the tiredness, but the aching and sleepiness isn't going away. If this continues, I'd likely leave.

- 1 of the managers I will no doubt have problems with in the future based on what I have seen so far.

- I'd like my own walk, but as I work in a large depot it seems that having my own walk is many years away. So for a long while I'll be thrown all over the place.


Right now I have no intentions to leave, but I do see potential reasons to leave if any of the above things get to me.

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 05:25

clashcityrocker wrote:It costs a lot of money to recruit and train a newstart.
You can't keep pissing money down the drain.


this itself should raise alarm bells above, but i guess those in charge at the bottom don't see this, just another body on the conveyor belt.
now RM have spent a fair few £s training up what probably would have been an excellent postie who more often than not completed even if going over an hour or 2 due to rounds not been ready when they should be (poor line manager) but they got abused by a dom and decided it wasn't for them.
not sure if the 2 are linked, but since they announced their "bonus" or lack of, ours have gone that far downhill they need spades to maintain their level of incompetence

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 09:14

Gasman11 wrote:
DGH wrote:
clashcityrocker wrote:It costs a lot of money to recruit and train a newstart.
You can't keep pissing money down the drain.

Part of the problem is a 25 hour contract isn't a living wage.
It doesn't provide a worthwhile pension.
It takes up a large chunk of the day, 5 days/week (with no advance warning of when the day off is scheduled) making a second job problematic.


Yes. And the union won't address this (in fairness it is now a widespread problem in society in general and pretty much ignored by all political parties, including - and disgracefully - Labour).


Labour have rightfully made a big deal of the growing proliferation of zero hour contracts and the gig economy for several years now to be fair and RM at least provide part timers with relatively secure employment compared to the aforementioned.


So you're saying that a regular but insufficient income is fine when compared with an irregular and insufficient income?

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 11:21

A guaranteed 25 hours a week is a hell of a lot better than zero hours. If RM offered those of us employed in MCs through Angard 25 hours a week contracts we’d snatch their hands off. It’d be more than sufficient for me and quite a few others I work with.

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 11:40

Maybe some managers are realising if they keep putting new starts on s**t duties they'll leave. They then have to go through the whole six month quest it seems, to get someone else. Not rocket science, but doubt most managers have any common sense, whatsoever. Got to be some good or even smart ones out there....Surely!!

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 20:51

DGH wrote:
Gasman11 wrote:
DGH wrote:
clashcityrocker wrote:It costs a lot of money to recruit and train a newstart.
You can't keep pissing money down the drain.

Part of the problem is a 25 hour contract isn't a living wage.
It doesn't provide a worthwhile pension.
It takes up a large chunk of the day, 5 days/week (with no advance warning of when the day off is scheduled) making a second job problematic.


Yes. And the union won't address this (in fairness it is now a widespread problem in society in general and pretty much ignored by all political parties, including - and disgracefully - Labour).


Labour have rightfully made a big deal of the growing proliferation of zero hour contracts and the gig economy for several years now to be fair and RM at least provide part timers with relatively secure employment compared to the aforementioned.


So you're saying that a regular but insufficient income is fine when compared with an irregular and insufficient income?


I didnt say it was fine, i was pointing out that Labour have been trying to defend those on the bottom rung of the employment ladder. Neither are completely ideal but, 25 hours a week guaranteed pay plus the ability to do overtime is better than the lottery of a zero hour contract where you are never sure whether you will get any work at all from week to week.

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 21:39

I've never worked in a DO but for many years haven't new starts in DOs always been given the s**t duties in an office that no one wants and got better duties as time goes on as they worked their way up the seniority list?

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 22:19

Gasman11 wrote:I didnt say it was fine, i was pointing out that Labour have been trying to defend those on the bottom rung of the employment ladder. Neither are completely ideal but, 25 hours a week guaranteed pay plus the ability to do overtime is better than the lottery of a zero hour contract where you are never sure whether you will get any work at all from week to week.


I have never really understood this whole argument against zero hours contracts. Zero hours contracts are great if you have other commitments. Maybe you work from home a few hours a day and need additional income.

If you need a secure 25+ hours a week work, then why on earth would you get a zero hours contract job?

staff turnover

04 Aug 2019, 22:53

Because you can’t pick and choose in today’s jobs market.

staff turnover

05 Aug 2019, 04:54

norris9 wrote:I have never really understood this whole argument against zero hours contracts. Zero hours contracts are great if you have other commitments. Maybe you work from home a few hours a day and need additional income.


This is fine if employers operate fairly. From what I have seen it's generally a one way street with flexible working from the employer but not the employee. If your boss rings you and asks you to do a shift and you say "no sorry i am not free" you can find you suddenly stop getting work !

If you need a secure 25+ hours a week work, then why on earth would you get a zero hours contract job?


Agreed but people do not always have a choice and take a zero hours contract job as they need money and cannot find anything else.

Zero hour contracts are always touted as being great and flexible and I am sure there are some cases where this is true but the real driver of course is cost saving for the employer and nothing else. It's always about money and there has been a squeeze on working conditions for years. Just looks at some of our competitors where you have to provide your own vehicle, business insurance and other expenses yourself and are lucky if you net £5 an hour after costs. Great business model for the employer :speak to the hand

staff turnover

05 Aug 2019, 18:35

norris9 wrote:
Gasman11 wrote:I didnt say it was fine, i was pointing out that Labour have been trying to defend those on the bottom rung of the employment ladder. Neither are completely ideal but, 25 hours a week guaranteed pay plus the ability to do overtime is better than the lottery of a zero hour contract where you are never sure whether you will get any work at all from week to week.


I have never really understood this whole argument against zero hours contracts. Zero hours contracts are great if you have other commitments. Maybe you work from home a few hours a day and need additional income.

If you need a secure 25+ hours a week work, then why on earth would you get a zero hours contract job?


A study last year found that the flexibility argument accounts for only 28% of those employed on zero hour contracts and 44% wanted more working hours and a greater degree of job security. Around 800,000 people are not guaranteed any hours by their employer and 30% of workers had no other option but to accept a zero hours contract because of the lack of job opportunities. Zero hour contracts are great, in the main for employers.

staff turnover

05 Aug 2019, 19:36

I had a temporary job on a zero hours contract a few years ago. I loved walking 30 minutes in December only to be told that, actually, there was no work for me after all. So, I think they’re bullshit. With that said, I wouldn’t outlaw them entirely - I would just make it illegal to employ staff on that basis. People who wanted that lop-sided version of 'flexibility' would still be able to, but the pathway to it would be via employee request.

Previous page Next page


Page 1 of 2   1, 2